I've been pondering this idea a bit lately and finally formalized it into a question. If you have thoughts about it, feel free to share them. I don't have any yet, but I do think it will be an interesting area of study... like 57 other areas of study I think would be interesting. :)
What does “security” or “safety” mean? And do we want it? At first blush it seems like something any rational person would desire. Yet thinking about it more deeply, what does that mean? Did not Satan offer “security” to all God’s children? That was certainly not desirable. What principles exist around “security” and “safety”? In what ways can “security” and “safety” benefit us and what ways can they damn us?
I looked up the definitions on dictionary.com. From that I've been trying to determine exactly what each word means. According to some definition, like the ones that imply a freedom from risk, danger, harm, etc. I would have to say I don't want them. I think that is the kind of "security" Satan offered God's children. Another definition of safety is the quality of averting loss (among other things). I oppose this as well. I can't think of any situation that I'd really like to be in where loss is not something that could happen. For example, let's just keep working with Satan, without the option to choose for myself, I would have nothing to lose (it would appear, forget the irony that choosing that is a choice in the first place, we know they lost their first estate already), but if I had picked that, I would also have given up my opportunity to become like Heavenly Father and have all that He has. Why would I ever pick that? So I also say no to safety in that sense. There are other definitions, but I think I wrote to much on that part already.
ReplyDeleteLooking at it from the opposite direction, the church has many guidelines/commandments for us. They offer us both safety and security when they are followed. It can be pointed out that we have to give things up and thus have a loss already to follow them. I suppose this is true. It doesn't bother me since I don't desire to have those things I have to give up and when I do give those things up I'm always happy about it.
I keep trying to think of the principles and have come to the conclusion that the words security and safety in and of themselves are so vague that principles are not in and of themselves (by me) derivable.
My synopsis is that I think when security and safety are offered, it needs to be accompanied by a detailed description of what the security is for or what is being kept safe and from what as well (did that make sense?). I would say I am against any vague offer of security or freedom and probably against many very well describe versions as well.
If this question was prompted by politics, I would have to say that I don't consider myself safe. I feel that my freedoms are greatly oppressed by this country as a whole. I don't feel safe or secure when it comes to finances, or my family, or the constitution, or my religion, or war (I'm fully convinced it is only a matter of time before there is physical war in this country), and pretty much everything else. In fact, I think that the lack of faith I have in our country when it comes to safety and security is a large reason why we've decided we want to homeschool. The only real safety and security I feel is when I obey the commandments and when I follow the promptings of the Spirit. It's at those times that I feel at peace and feel safe and feel secure. I dare say no others.
So my real synopsis is that real safety and security where we are kept from harms way (harm being where we are eternally damned and kept from those things we really want most) can only be given by a loving God and none else. That is the end of my longer than your post comment.
If there was a like button on comments, I would "like" your longer-than-my-post comment. :)
ReplyDelete